Revolutionizing Reconstruction: The Role of Custom Implants in Orbital and Zygomatic Complex Fractures
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: In the realm of orbital reconstruction following traumatic fractures involving the zygomatic complex (ZMC), the adoption of patient-specific implants (PSI) crafted through computer-assisted technology prompts inquiry into its comparative efficacy against conventional methods. This study investigates whether PSI enhances outcomes—such as orbital volume, enophthalmos, diplopia, implant malposition, and ZMC symmetry—in adult patients, compared to conventional approaches.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, focusing on peer-reviewed articles published after 2014 that reported comparisons between implants based on computer-assisted technology and conventional methods for orbital bone and zygomatic complex fractures in adults. Databases and trial registries were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed to assess the quality of studies included in this systematic review.
Results: Following a comprehensive literature search, 1,463 articles were initially identified and screened for relevance and duplication, resulting in a final selection of 3 articles. Orbital and zygomatic complex reconstruction using patient-specific implants (PSI) was performed in 61 patients, while 70 patients underwent conventional methods. The most common post-surgical complications included enophthalmos (n=23), diplopia (n=20), and implant malposition (n=13). PSI facilitated the restoration of orbital volume levels between injured and uninjured orbital bones and achieved ZMC symmetry. All studies included in this review were categorized as level 3 evidence.
Conclusion: This examination of published literature on PSI for orbital and ZMC fracture reconstruction underscores that, while PSI can effectively, precisely, and safely address orbital fractures, patient outcomes are largely comparable to those achieved with conventional methods, and PSI do not present a clear advantage over conventional implants.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Schneider M, Besmens IS, Luo Y, Giovanoli P, Lindenblatt N. Surgical management of isolated orbital floor and zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures with focus on surgical approaches and complications. J Plast Surg Hand Surg [Internet]. 2020 Jul 31;54(4):200–6.
II. Shikara MA, Vakharia KT, Greywoode JD. Zygomaticomaxillary complex–orbit fracture alignment: Comparison of buccal and orbital approach techniques. JAMA Facial Plast Surg [Internet]. 2018 Sep 1;20(5):428–9.
III. Chepurnyi Y, Chernohorskyi D, Zhukovtceva O, Poutala A, Kopchak A. Automatic evaluation of the orbital shape after application of conventional and patient-specific implants: Correlation of initial trauma patterns and outcome. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(4):733–7.
IV. Longeac M, Depeyre A, Pereira B, Barthelemy I, Pham Dang N. Virtual surgical planning and three-dimensional printing for the treatment of comminuted zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;122(4):386–90.
V. Committeri U, Arena A, Carraturo E, Austoni M, Germano C, Salzano G, et al. Incidence of Orbital Side Effects in Zygomaticomaxillary Complex and Isolated Orbital Walls Fractures: A Retrospective Study in South Italy and a Brief Review of the Literature. Vol. 12, Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023.
VI. Isya Wahdini S, Dachlan I, Seswandhana R, Hutagalung MR, Putri IL, Afandy D. Neglected orbitozygomaticomaxillary fractures with complications: A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2019 Jan 1;62:35–9.
VII. Murray-Douglass A, Snoswell C, Winter C, Harris R. Three-dimensional (3D) printing for post-traumatic orbital reconstruction, a systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022;60(9):1176–83.
VIII. Maher DI, Hall AJ, Gwini SM, Ben Artsi E. Patient-specific Implants for Orbital Fractures: A Systematic Review. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2022;38(5):417–24.
IX. Lehtinen V, Salli M, Pyötsiä K, Toivari M, Snäll J. Primary reconstruction of combined orbital and zygomatic complex fractures with patient-specific milled titanium implants – A retrospective study. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022;50(10):756–64.
X. Kotecha S, Ferro A, Harrison P, Fan K. Orbital reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the role of patient-specific implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;27(2):213–26.
XI. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ [Internet]. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71.
XII. Lo CKL, Mertz D, Loeb M. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers’ to authors’ assessments. BMC Med Res Methodol [Internet]. 2014;14(1):45.
XIII. van de Schoot R, de Bruin J, Schram R, Zahedi P, de Boer J, Weijdema F, et al. An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews. Nat Mach Intell [Internet]. 2021;3(2):125–33.
XIV. Chepurnyi Y, Chernogorskyi D, Kopchak A, Petrenko O. Clinical efficacy of peek patient-specific implants in orbital reconstruction. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(2):49–53.
XV. Furst IM, Austin P, Pharoah M, Mahoney J. The use of computed tomography to define zygomatic complex position. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery [Internet]. 2001;59(6):647–54.
XVI. Lehtinen V, Pyötsiä K, Snäll J, Toivari M. Zygomatico-Orbital Fracture-Dislocation in Surgical Treatment: Novel 3-Dimensional Software Automated Analysis. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery [Internet]. 2020;78(8):1372–81.
XVII. Prajapati V, Shahi A, Prakash O, Ekram S. Etiology, Modalities of Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fracture, open reduction and fixation. J Clin Exp Dent [Internet]. 2021;e215–20.
XVIII. Chandra L, Deepa D, Atri M, Pandey S, Passi D, Goyal J, et al. A retrospective cross-sectional study of maxillofacial trauma in Delhi-NCR Region. J Family Med Prim Care [Internet]. 2019;8(4):1453.
XIX. Dubron K, Van Camp P, Jacobs R, Politis C, Shaheen E. Accuracy of virtual planning and intraoperative navigation in zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: A systematic review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2022;123(6):e841–8.
XX. Khomutinnikova NE, Durnovo EA, Vyseltseva Y V., Gorbatov RO. Digital technologies in the surgical treatment of post-traumatic zygomatico-orbital deformities. Sovremennye Tehnologii v Medicine. 2020;12(3):55–61.
XXI. Panneerselvam E, Ravi P, Sasikala B. Fractures of the Zygomaticomaxillary Complex BT - Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery for the Clinician. In: Bonanthaya K, Panneerselvam E, Manuel S, Kumar V V, Rai A, editors. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2021. p. 1151–99.
XXII. Hartmann A, Kämmerer P, Ortolano LC, Sagheb K, Seiler M. Customised products for orbital wall reconstruction: a systematic review. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery [Internet]. 2022 Jun;60(5):e702–11.
XXIII. Salli MI, Nikunen M, Snäll J. Primary reconstruction of extensive orbital fractures using two-piece patient-specific implants: the Helsinki protocol. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;27(2):333–40.
XXIV. Timoshchuk MA, Murnan EJ, Chapple AG, Christensen BJ. Do Patient-Specific Implants Decrease Complications and Increase Orbital Volume Reconstruction Accuracy in Primary Orbital Fracture Reconstruction? Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022;80(4):669–75.
XXV. Sigron GR, Rüedi N, Chammartin F, Meyer S, Msallem B, Kunz C, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of isolated orbital floor fractures pre-and post-reconstruction with standard titanium meshes and “hybrid” patient-specific implants. J Clin Med. 2020;9(5).
XXVI. Pietzka S, Wenzel M, Winter K, Wilde F, Schramm A, Ebeling M, et al. Comparison of Anatomical Preformed Titanium Implants and Patient-Specific CAD/CAM Implants in the Primary Reconstruction of Isolated Orbital Fractures—A Retrospective Study. J Pers Med [Internet]. 2023 May 17;13(5):846.
XXVII. Jiang C, Lin Y, Jiang Y, Huang J, Wang R, Lin L, et al. Modified patient-specific surgical-guide-assisted precise treatment of unilateral comminuted zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: A 5-year retrospective study. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery [Internet]. 2024;
XXVIII. Xu G, Zhang X, Wang P, Long J. Application of optimized three-dimensional digital surgical guide plates for complex midfacial fractures. Injury [Internet]. 2022 Jun;53(6):2005–15.
XXIX. Fan B, Chen H, Sun YJ, Wang BF, Che L, Liu SY, et al. Clinical effects of 3-D printing-assisted personalized reconstructive surgery for blowout orbital fractures. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology [Internet]. 2017 Oct 7;255(10):2051–7.
XXX. Chepurnyi Y, Zhukovtseva O, Kopchak A, Kanura O. Clinical application of automated virtual orbital reconstruction for orbital fracture management with patient-specific implants: A prospective comparative study. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022;50(9):686–91.
XXXI. Costan VV, Nicolau A, Sulea D, Ciofu ML, Boișteanu O, Popescu E. The Impact of 3D Technology in Optimizing Midface Fracture Treatment—Focus on the Zygomatic Bone. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery [Internet]. 2021;79(4):880–91.
XXXII. Han C, Zhang X, Li K, Huang D, Liu L. Application of customized integration titanium mesh in the treatment of complicated zygomatic complex fractures: A prospective randomized clinical study. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022;50(4):304–9.
XXXIII. Wang H, Chi Y, Huang H, Su S, Xue H, Hou J. Combined use of 3D printing and computer-assisted navigation in the clinical treatment of multiple maxillofacial fractures. Asian J Surg. 2023;46(6):2284–92.
XXXIV. Rana M, Chui CHK, Wagner M, Zimmerer R, Rana M, Gellrich NC. Increasing the accuracy of orbital reconstruction with selective laser-melted patient-specific implants combined with intraoperative navigation. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2015 Jun;73(6):1113–8.